Posted by Laurey on Tuesday, February 8, 2011 at 3:48pm.
I think I may have found the problem in my thinking:
R2 is not equivalent right? Because it is not transitive.
Justification:
It is reflexive because the relation does contain (0,0), (1,1), (2,2), and (3,3).
It is symmetric because the relation contains (1,3) ⋏ (3,1), and (2,3) ⋏ (3,2)
Though the relation contains (1,3) ⋏ (3,2) it does not have (1,2), which means it is not transitive.
R1: This relations is equivalent (agree)
R2 is not equivalent right? Because it is not transitive. (agree)
R3: This relation is not equivalent because the relation contains (1,2), but not (2,1) (agree)
Excellent!
Thank you for the reassurance.
Keep up the good work!
Related Questions
Discrete Math - Consider the following relations on R, the set of real numbers a...
Math - Suppose R is the relation on N where aRb means that a ends in the same ...
Math - Let R1 be a binary relation on the set of integers defined as follows: R1...
Discrete Math - Consider the following relation on R1, the set of real numbers ...
social studies - Although the Chesapeake and New England colonies differed in ...
Discrete Math - a) Show that the relation R on Z x Z defined by (a , b) R (c, d...
Math - Which of the following relations has this characteristic: The relation is...
math - find the domain & range of each relation & identify any relations...
american history - Was it Ivy Lee or Henry Ford that pioneered the field of ...
Labor Relations - Please explain the labor relations process and the phases in ...
For Further Reading